Re: Fw: Question about GPL (semi off topic)
[email protected] Wed, 1 Jun 2005 16:40:27 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.enhydra.barracuda.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 00820D8788257013_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Christian, May want to as MySQL/Matt Fredrickson, What parts of the GPL covers the requirement of an ASP providing a service to require a commercial license since there is no distribution of code? Edward Christian Cryder <[email protected]> 06/01/2005 08:44 AM Please respond to christian.cryder To: [email protected] cc: Subject: Re: Fw: [barracuda] Question about GPL (semi off topic) Just an FYI... Here's the response I got from the MySQL guys. -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matt Fredrickson <[email protected]> Date: May 18, 2005 4:12 PM Subject: MySQL Inquiry To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Hi Christian, Thank you for your interest in MySQL. If you are an ASP and your application is not open source, we will need to arrange some sort of arrangement. Do you pay you a service or subscription fee? How is that structured? If you are not an ASP and you are simply letting the public access your website, licensing is not required and you are fine with the GPL. Sincerely, Matt Fredrickson -------------------------------------------------------------------- So from their perspective, if you are an ASP (which we consider ourselves to be), you must either GPL your app -OR- pay them a license fee. Since we aren't inclined to do either of those, MySQL won't be an option for us. What is not clear to me is how they are reading the GPL to arrive at this conclusion. What is clear to me is that they evidently feel they have a legal basis for their position, so it seems fairly risky (to me) to simply bank on my own interpretation of the license here. If this is in fact the case, it would seem to have significant implications for any ASP models using GPL code - what they seem to be saying is that it doesn't matter whether you extend or even redistribute the code (we don't do either). What matters is that you are "a for-profit business is using the code in a centrally hosted application which their customers can access." Anyway, just thought I'd share our findings... Christian [email protected] wrote: Hi Christian, 1. If you are not distributing GPL code, you have no GPL issues (But see #4 below) From the http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html, Section 0, Paragraph 2: Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the Program does. 2. Internal distribution is NOT distribution http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCInternalDistribution Is making and using multiple copies within one organization or company "distribution"? No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As a consequence, a company or other organization can develop a modified version and install that version through its own facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that modified version to outsiders. However, when the organization transfers copies to other organizations or individuals, that is distribution. In particular, providing copies to contractors for use off-site is distribution. Even if not, you only have to provide the source to the people who has obtained the executable. They can't ask for the source if they don't have the exe. http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCCanIDemandACopy If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I demand he give me a copy? No. The GPL gives him permission to make and redistribute copies of the program if he chooses to do so. He also has the right not to redistribute the program, if that is what he chooses 3. There were some issue about the output of the application FAQ: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWhatCaseIsOutputGPL In what cases is the output of a GPL program covered by the GPL too? Only when the program copies part of itself into the output. 4. Here is where you may be in trouble.... It says you are ok. but in the next paragraph it says you may not be..... http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCUnreleasedMods A company is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site. Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources? The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it without ever distributing it to others. What this company is doing is a special case of that. Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources. It is essential for people to have the freedom to make modifications and use them privately, without ever publishing those modifications. However, putting the program on a server machine for the public to talk to is hardly "private" use, so it would be legitimate to require release of the source code in that special case. We are thinking about doing something like this in GPL version 3, but we don't have precise wording in mind yet. In the mean time, you might want to use the Affero GPL for programs designed for network server use. All of the above is really a secondary question. The real question is does you program come under the GPL just because you use the MySql jdbc driver. Under the GPL, If your program uses a GPL library, then your program becomes subject to the GPL (the reason for the LGPL, the Lesser GPL) A. So the driver is under the GPL. If I make changes to the driver, I have to release the changes to the driver. B. If I use the driver, Is that like linking to the library? and comes under the GPL. C. Driver is not a library, and so my application is not subject to the GPL. So back to the GPL FAQ's http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCGPLPluginsInNF http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCNFUseGPLPlugins Seems to suggest that only way option C would apply is if an exec or fork is used to access/invoke the driver Finally, given that MySQL went through the effort to change their Driver license from LGPL to GPL (to "more easily differentiate between a proprietary user who should buy a commercial license ") would suggest that the applications would come under the GPL http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/faq.html Previously, the MySQL client libraries were licensed under the LGPL (the Lesser General Public License) and now they use the GPL (the General Public License). What prompted this change? MySQL's goal is to provide all its software under a free software/open source license. The change from the LGPL to the GPL for the client libraries was made in 2001 during the development of MySQL 4.0 to help MySQL AB more easily differentiate between a proprietary user who should buy a commercial license ... In Conclusion, My opinion (I'm not a lawyer) is that if you use the MySQL driver, your application becomes subject to the GPL license. Given that the Barracuda is under the LGPL, no real issues with the application. So only issue is #4 above.... Using the application on a public web site **MIGHT** be considered distribution in the future ... Edward Christian Cryder <[email protected]> 05/13/2005 11:54 AM Please respond to christian.cryder To: BarracudaMVC <[email protected]> cc: Subject: [barracuda] Question about GPL (semi off topic) Hey, I am researching open source db's on Linux right now, looking primarily at Postgress (BSD) vs. MySQL (GPL), and I am just wondering about licensing issues. My understanding is that if you are simply _using_ a GPL'd product (like a db), rather than actually modiying or bundling it, GPL wouldn't apply to your code. But the MySQL site seems kind of ambiguous in how they describe it. So to put it specfically - proprietary server based applications (ie. vertical solutions) that use Barracuda, Tomcat, etc. and simply store/retrieve data in a GPL DB would NOT be subject to GPL. Right? Anyone know of any resources out there that would explicitly confirm (or deny!) that understanding? -- Christian Christian Cryder Internet Architect, ATMReports.com "Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today" http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com -- Christian Christian Cryder Internet Architect, ATMReports.com "Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today" http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com --=_alternative 00820D8788257013_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" <br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Christian,</font> <br> <br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">May want to as MySQL/Matt Fredrickson, </font> <br> <br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">What parts of the GPL covers the requirement of an ASP providing a service to require a commercial license </font> <br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">since there is no distribution of code?</font> <br> <br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Edward</font> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td> <td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Christian Cryder <[email protected]></b></font> <p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">06/01/2005 08:44 AM</font> <br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Please respond to christian.cryder</font> <td><font size=1 face="Arial"> </font> <br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> To: [email protected]</font> <br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> cc: </font> <br><font size=1 face="sans-serif"> Subject: Re: Fw: [barracuda] Question about GPL (semi off topic)</font></table> <br> <br> <br><font size=3>Just an FYI... Here's the response I got from the MySQL guys.</font> <br><font size=3><tt>--------------------------------------------------------------------<br> From: Matt Fredrickson </tt></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=3 color=blue><tt><u><[email protected]></u></tt></font></a><font size=3><tt><br> Date: May 18, 2005 4:12 PM<br> Subject: MySQL Inquiry<br> To: </tt></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=3 color=blue><tt><u>"[email protected]"</u></tt></font></a><font size=3><tt> </tt></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=3 color=blue><tt><u><[email protected]></u></tt></font></a><font size=3><tt><br> <br> <br> Hi Christian,<br> <br> Thank you for your interest in MySQL. If you are an ASP and your<br> application is not open source, we will need to arrange some sort of<br> arrangement. Do you pay you a service or subscription fee? How is<br> that structured?<br> <br> If you are not an ASP and you are simply letting the public access<br> your website, licensing is not required and you are fine with the GPL.<br> <br> Sincerely,<br> Matt Fredrickson</tt></font> <br><font size=3>--------------------------------------------------------------------<br> <br> So from their perspective, if you are an ASP (which we consider ourselves to be), you must either GPL your app -OR- pay them a license fee. Since we aren't inclined to do either of those, MySQL won't be an option for us.<br> <br> What is not clear to me is how they are reading the GPL to arrive at this conclusion. What is clear to me is that they evidently feel they have a legal basis for their position, so it seems fairly risky (to me) to simply bank on my own interpretation of the license here.<br> <br> If this is in fact the case, it would seem to have significant implications for any ASP models using GPL code - what they seem to be saying is that it doesn't matter whether you extend or even redistribute the code (we don't do either). What matters is that you are "a for-profit business is using the code in a centrally hosted application which their customers can access."<br> <br> Anyway, just thought I'd share our findings...<br> Christian<br> </font><font size=3 color=blue><u><br> </u></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=3 color=blue><u>[email protected]</u></font></a><font size=3> wrote: </font> <br><font size=3><br> Hi Christian, <br> <br> 1. If you are not distributing GPL code, you have no GPL issues (But see #4 below) <br> From the </font><a href=http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html><font size=3 color=blue><u>http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html</u></font></a><font size=3>, Section 0, Paragraph 2: <br> <br> Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not covered by this License; they <br> are outside its scope. The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program <br> is covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program (independent of having been made <br> by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the Program does. <br> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> 2. Internal distribution is NOT distribution</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> </font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCInternalDistribution"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCInternalDistribution</u></font></a><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> Is making and using multiple copies within one organization or company "distribution"?</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> No, in that case the organization is just making the copies for itself. As a consequence, <br> a company or other organization can develop a modified version and install that version</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> through its own facilities, without giving the staff permission to release that modified version to outsiders.</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> However, when the organization transfers copies to other organizations or individuals, that is distribution. <br> In particular, providing copies to contractors for use off-site is distribution. </font><font size=3><br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> Even if not, you only have to provide the source to the people who has obtained the executable. </font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> They can't ask for the source if they don't have the exe.</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> </font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCCanIDemandACopy"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCCanIDemandACopy</u></font></a><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I demand he give me a copy?</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> No. The GPL gives him permission to make and redistribute copies of the program if he chooses to do so. <br> He also has the right not to redistribute the program, if that is what he chooses</font><font size=3> <br> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> 3. There were some issue about the output of the application</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> FAQ: </font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWhatCaseIsOutputGPL"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCWhatCaseIsOutputGPL</u></font></a><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> In what cases is the output of a GPL program covered by the GPL too?</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> Only when the program copies part of itself into the output.</font><font size=3> <br> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> 4. Here is where you may be in trouble.... It says you are ok. but in the next paragraph it says you may not be.....</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> </font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCUnreleasedMods"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCUnreleasedMods</u></font></a><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> A company is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site. Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources?</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it without ever distributing it to others. <br> What this company is doing is a special case of that. Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources.</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> It is essential for people to have the freedom to make modifications and use them privately,</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> without ever publishing those modifications. However, putting the program on a server machine <br> for the public to talk to is hardly "private" use, so it would be legitimate to require release of the <br> source code in that special case. We are thinking about doing something like this in <br> GPL version 3, but we don't have precise wording in mind yet.</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> In the mean time, you might want to use the Affero GPL for programs designed for network server use. </font><font size=3><br> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> All of the above is really a secondary question. </font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> The real question is does you program come under the GPL just because you use the MySql jdbc driver.</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> Under the GPL, If your program uses a GPL library, then your program becomes subject to the GPL (the reason for the LGPL, the Lesser GPL)</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> A. So the driver is under the GPL. If I make changes to the driver, I have to release the changes to the driver.</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> B. If I use the driver, Is that like linking to the library? and comes under the GPL.</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> C. Driver is not a library, and so my application is not subject to the GPL.</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> So back to the GPL FAQ's</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u><br> </u></font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCGPLPluginsInNF"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCGPLPluginsInNF</u></font></a><font size=3> </font><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u><br> </u></font><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCNFUseGPLPlugins"><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#TOCNFUseGPLPlugins</u></font></a><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> Seems to suggest that only way option C would apply is if an exec or fork is used to access/invoke the driver</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> Finally, given that MySQL went through the effort to change their Driver license from LGPL to GPL <br> (to "more easily differentiate between a proprietary user who should buy a commercial license ") <br> would suggest that the applications would come under the GPL</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> </font><a href=http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/faq.html><font size=2 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u>http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/licensing/faq.html</u></font></a><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> Previously, the MySQL client libraries were licensed under the LGPL (the Lesser General Public License) <br> and now they use the GPL (the General Public License). What prompted this change?</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> MySQL's goal is to provide all its software under a free software/open source license. The change from the <br> LGPL to the GPL for the client libraries was made in 2001 during the development of MySQL 4.0 to help MySQL AB <br> more easily differentiate between a proprietary user who should buy a commercial license ...</font><font size=3> <br> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> In Conclusion, <br> My opinion (I'm not a lawyer) is that if you use the MySQL driver, your application becomes subject to the GPL license.</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> Given that the Barracuda is under the LGPL, no real issues with the application.</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> So only issue is #4 above.... Using the application on a public web site **MIGHT** be considered distribution in the future ...</font><font size=3> <br> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br> <br> Edward</font><font size=3><br> <br> <br> </font> <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td width=2%> <td width=44%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Christian Cryder </b></font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=1 color=blue face="sans-serif"><b><u><[email protected]></u></b></font></a><font size=3> </font> <p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">05/13/2005 11:54 AM</font><font size=3> </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><br> Please respond to christian.cryder</font><font size=3> </font> <td width=52%><font size=1 face="Arial"> </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><br> To: BarracudaMVC </font><a href=mailto:[email protected]><font size=1 color=blue face="sans-serif"><u><[email protected]></u></font></a><font size=3> </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><br> cc: </font><font size=3> </font><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><br> Subject: [barracuda] Question about GPL (semi off topic)</font></table> <br><font size=3><br> <br> <br> Hey, I am researching open source db's on Linux right now, looking primarily at Postgress (BSD) vs. MySQL (GPL), and I am just wondering about licensing issues. My understanding is that if you are simply _using_ a GPL'd product (like a db), rather than actually modiying or bundling it, GPL wouldn't apply to your code. But the MySQL site seems kind of ambiguous in how they describe it.<br> <br> So to put it specfically - proprietary server based applications (ie. vertical solutions) that use Barracuda, Tomcat, etc. and simply store/retrieve data in a GPL DB would NOT be subject to GPL. Right? <br> <br> Anyone know of any resources out there that would explicitly confirm (or deny!) that understanding? <br> -- </font> <p><font size=3>Christian </font> <p> <table width=100%> <tr> <td width=100%> <hr> <tr> <td><font size=3 face="Arial">Christian Cryder<br> Internet Architect, </font><a href=http://atmreports.com/><font size=3 color=blue face="Arial"><u>ATMReports.com</u></font></a><font size=3> </font> <tr> <td> <hr> <tr> <td> <div align=center><font size=3><i>"Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today"</i></font><font size=3 color=blue><u><br> </u></font><a href=http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com/><font size=2 color=blue><i><u>http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com</u></i></font></a></div></table> <br><font size=3><br> </font> <p><font size=3><br> </font> <br><font size=3>-- </font> <p><font size=3>Christian</font> <p> <table width=100%> <tr> <td width=100%> <hr> <tr> <td><font size=3 face="Arial">Christian Cryder<br> Internet Architect, </font><a href=http://atmreports.com/><font size=3 color=blue face="Arial"><u>ATMReports.com</u></font></a> <tr> <td> <hr> <tr> <td> <div align=center><font size=3><i>"Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today"</i></font><font size=3 color=blue><i><u><br> </u></i></font><a href=http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com/><font size=2 color=blue><i><u>http://seelifedifferently.blogspot.com</u></i></font></a></div></table> <br> <br> --=_alternative 00820D8788257013_=--